
What if your student finished a year of American history and couldn’t tell you what year the Civil War ended but could tell you exactly why it still matters today? For most of us, that’s not how history class worked. We memorized dates, filled in timelines, and moved on. And most of us forgot nearly everything within a year.
I’ve taught history both ways, both sequentially and thematically. I’m convinced that the thematic approach isn’t just more engaging. It’s more honest about what history actually is.
History Is About Humans, Not Timelines
We study history to learn about people: what they thought, who they fought, what they built, how they organized their lives, what they celebrated, who they worshiped, what they wore, what they ate, who they loved. We study it to understand the context of all of those things. This is the why, the so what, and what it tells us about both the past and the present.
When I taught history sequentially, something kept nagging at me. We were covering events, but we weren’t sitting with them long enough to really understand them. Students were moving through history like tourists. They could see the sights, but never really arrived anywhere. This bugged me. So I started building something different.
Big Questions Instead of Big Timelines
I developed what I call “big questions,” or themes that come up again and again throughout history, and that are very much alive in the world today. Each unit in my courses is organized around one of these questions. We start with something modern, something students can place themselves in. Then we look backward: How has this question been answered before? Was it always answered the same way? Did different groups of people answer it differently, and why?
For my world history students, those big questions are:
Here’s what that looks like in practice. When world history students reach the question about political and social change, we read exerpts from Václav Havel’s essay The Power of the Powerless. Written in 1978 in communist Czechoslovakia and circulated in secret, it is arguably one of the documents that helped bring down a regime. Havel argued that ordinary people living under oppressive systems participate in their own oppression every day through small acts of conformity, and that the most revolutionary thing a person can do is simply stop pretending. He called it “living in the truth.”
For high schoolers who often feel like the world is chaotic and their voice doesn’t matter, that idea lands hard. We talk about what it means to take one small step toward living in truth in their own lives, in their own moment. And then we look at the Velvet Revolution, and what happened when enough people did exactly that. History stops being something that happened to other people, and starts being something they can imagine participating in.
For my U.S. history students, the questions are:
The U.S. history questions come alive in unexpected ways too. When students reach the question about immigration, we don’t just talk about Ellis Island and European arrivals. We follow the thread of culture, and how people carry their identities across oceans and borders even under the most brutal conditions. That’s how we end up talking about the African origins of the banjo, and how a musical tradition survived the Middle Passage to become a foundation of what we now call American music. That’s the kind of connection that makes history land.
Why This Works, Especially for Homeschoolers
These two examples, Havel and the banjo, point to something important about what thematic history can do that sequential history usually can’t. One shows students that their own sense of agency has deep historical roots. The other shows them that the culture surrounding them every day has a history worth knowing. Together, they make the same argument: the past is not separate from your life. It’s woven into it.
Many homeschooled students have already moved through the classical four-year cycle of history in elementary and middle school. They’ve seen the timeline. What they often haven’t had the chance to do is slow down and ask harder questions about what it all means.
We live in a world of nearly unlimited historical information. Timelines, databases, encyclopedias and all a search away. What’s harder to find, and harder to teach, is the ability to interpret, analyze, and compare. That’s what the big questions framework is designed to build.
Students who complete my courses leave with more than historical knowledge. They leave with a way of thinking about evidence, about context, about the distance and the closeness between the past and the present. And in my experience, that’s exactly what sticks.